Cannabis News Media Awareness Project
  Pipe Dream?
Posted by CN Staff on February 11, 2004 at 09:18:49 PT
By Bill Breen, Senior Writer 
Source: Fast Company  

medical At a secret location in southeastern England, the British biotech GW Pharmaceuticals has built what might well be the most high-tech pot palace on the planet. Surrounded by electrified razor wire and video cameras, the one-acre greenhouse contains more than 15,000 pharmaceutical-grade marijuana plants, which GW uses for research and for the production of cannabis-based medicines. Since 1998, when British regulators granted GW a license to cultivate marijuana, the company has harvested more than 300,000 plants.

The United States has its own version of a marijuana-growing facility. Administered by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, it is the country's only legal source of marijuana for medical research. The U.S. pot farm, managed under contract at the University of Mississippi, is also ringed by high-tech surveillance equipment. But here, the similarity with GW ends.

As its name would imply, the National Institute on Drug Abuse is concerned more with marijuana's supposed dangers than its potential benefits. Thus, it is not exactly inclined to produce GW-like quantities of' home-grown: NIDA distributes its material to just a handful of clinical programs and exactly seven patients, the sole survivors of the several dozen patients who were legally allowed to use medical marijuana under the government's "compassionate use" investigational new drug program. And the quality of NIDA's pot? Based on the photographic evidence, NIDA's concoction of seeds, stems, and leaves more closely resembles dried cat brier than cannabis.

Ethan Russo, a physician specializing in child neurology and a senior scientific advisor to GW, received 100 grams of NIDA marijuana in 1997. He pronounced it "relatively impotent" and "unsuitable to be smoked by patients for medical indications." Concludes Russo, in a letter to Frank Sapienza, a just-retired officer in the DEA's drug and chemical evaluation unit: "Unfortunately, the material was of such poor quality, we did not deem it to be representative of true medical cannabis, and have not yet ascertained an appropriate set of biochemical experiments for which to utilize it."

Rick Doblin argues that the federal government is using NIDA to stymie research on medical marijuana by producing substandard plants for scientific study and by making it difficult or impossible for FDA researchers to obtain the drug. Doblin believes he has a prescription for fixing NIDA's ailing medical-marijuana program: establish an alternative.

Doblin, who holds a Harvard Ph.D. in public policy, is the president of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, a nonprofit pharmaceutical company. Like many of the pioneers in the Aboveground Marijuana Economy, he is driven, opinionated, and simultaneously idealistic and street smart. His big goal is to build and sponsor a thriving medical-marijuana research community in this country, which would one day lead the federal Food and Drug Administration to approve marijuana-based prescription medicines. To that end, Doblin wants to establish a cannabis-growing facility at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Such an operation would produce high-quality, genetically consistent cannabis that would meet researchers' specifications; it would also provide a privately funded alternative to NIDA. The U. Mass.-Amherst operation would be overseen by Lyle Craker, an expert in medicinal-plant sciences who has taught at the campus for the past 20 years.

Doblin argues that pharmaceutical companies will never invest in cannabis-based drug development, so long as NIDA is the sole legal supplier of medical marijuana. No company, he believes, will sponsor cannabis research when it lacks quality control and access to the very product that it would one day hope to market. Thus, Doblin and Craker have been trying for nearly four years to obtain a Drug Enforcement Agency license to establish a legal source of medical marijuana at U. Mass. for privately funded research.

"The government knows that as long as NIDA retains a monopoly on the supply of an inferior marijuana product and arbitrarily provides it to some -- but not all -- FDA-approved protocols, that it can effectively prevent privately funded marijuana-based drug development from taking place in this country," says Doblin. "Their rhetoric says we need more research; their actions demonstrate they fear what the research will reveal."

You'd be forgiven for thinking that Doblin's quest is acutely quixotic, given the Bush Administration's position on medical marijuana. Andrea Barthwell, a deputy director in the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and President Bush's point person on medical marijuana, says that cannabis medicines aren't compatible with modern science. She declined to comment on Craker's DEA application. But she asserted that marijuana "is a crude plant product that most definitely is not a medicine."

Doblin counters that he is just taking the federal government at its word. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine, working at the behest of the White House drug czar's office, issued a lengthy report that assessed the scientific evidence concerning potential medical uses of marijuana. It's preeminent recommendation: "Research should continue into the physiological effects of synthetic and plant-derived cannabinoids."

Doblin asserts that that is exactly what he is trying to do: further the research into medical marijuana, "which is the federal government's stated policy." He has won an impressive array of allies, including both of Massachusetts's U.S. senators, Edward Kennedy and John Kerry. In a letter to DEA chief Karen Tandy, Kennedy and Kerry asserted that the NIDA facility at the University of Mississippi "has an unjustifiable monopoly on the production of marijuana for legitimate medical and research purposes in the United States. The current lack of competition...jeopardizes important research into the therapeutic effects of marijuana for patients undergoing chemotherapy or suffering from AIDS, glaucoma, or other diseases."

Doblin and Craker are still awaiting word from the DEA on their application's status. But Doblin, citing the public's growing acceptance of medical marijuana, likes their chances. "It's in the DEA's best interest to put this issue behind them, and let us proceed with the research," he says. "Then the ball would be in our court, and we would have to prove that marijuana is as good a medicine as we think it is."

Note: Rick Doblin has a prescription for fixing NIDA's ailing medical-marijuana program: establish an alternative.

This Web Exclusive is offered as a supplement to Fast Company's February 2004 article "The Cannabis Conundrum."

Source: Fast Company (NY)
Author: Bill Breen, Senior Writer
Published: February 2004 - Issue 79
Copyright: 2004 Gruner and Jahr USA Publishing
Contact: loop@fastcompany.com
Website: http://www.fastcompany.com/

Related Articles & Web Sites:

MAPS
http://www.maps.org/

GW Pharmaceuticals
http://www.gwpharm.com/

The Cannabis Conundrum
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18285.shtml

Kerry: End Medical Marijuana Prosecution
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18114.shtml

Senators Back UM Medical Marijuana
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17685.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #14 posted by FoM on February 11, 2004 at 16:50:52 PT
Virgil
It doesn't really matter to me. I don't want to talk about Kerry because you don't like him so why should we talk about him? I don't talk about Dennis? That's the way we should leave it because I won't argue about politics.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #13 posted by Virgil on February 11, 2004 at 16:34:50 PT
It is about seeing it correctly
The magician says "Keep your eyes on my hands." You are way to close to this. Look at the idea of chosing Boston as a growing site. Cold and a short growing season. They just spent $18 billion on a big dig and we do not need to be building greenhouses on some of the most expensive land in the country.

I am just trying to be analytical. My feeling of course is that the states have the right to grow it but the federal overreach owns that ground at is somewhat irrelevant. But here we have two Senators from MA trying to be seens as cannabis friendly when if they were they would call for moving cannbis to its proper classification.

All I said was that this was a letter in support of spending money. They have websites and could actually come out and say that we need to take cannabis out of Schedule 1 and they could also introduce legislation in the Senate.

All I am trying to do is unspin what the spinsters are spinning. Dr. Russo was given 100 grams of cannabis from Mississippi to do his research. He would determine it worthless for study because of its low grade. Now figure how much Miracleplant is needed for all the demonization studies in the US. How much would that be? Ten pounds. Twenty pounds? They can grow all the cannabis they now need in Mississippi. But now am I for letting MA grow all the cannabis they want for research and unhindered research funded by the the state of MA? Absolutely.

All I am saying is that this is completely spun out of context. Now if these two Senators said all University systems should be allowed to grow there on cannabis and do there on research, it would be like WOW! That is just not the case here. I am just telling it like I see it.

Besides that, we are being asked to give them credit for writing a letter. Usually it takes results to get credit in the real world. Now, if they actually got some plants growing and some real research done, it would be a different story.



[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #12 posted by FoM on February 11, 2004 at 15:30:15 PT
Virgil
I really don't understand why any news that might help us isn't good. We just see things differently. I'm trying to look for something good out of anything that is put in front of us as a possibility. That gives me hope.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #11 posted by Virgil on February 11, 2004 at 15:23:37 PT
Research under the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
The ruling of the 9th Circuit applies only to the 9th Circuit and is very limited in its ruling. We do not even know if the December 16th ruling will face appeal. One would think that the State of California could grow cannabis or at least bring patients in for study using cannabis that the patients grew. Anyway, the limits of federal authority are still being defined and everything is fuzzy on this issue.

Concerning the letter for getting MA some research money, it is somewhat bogus. There is no reason that Mississippi cannot provide all the cannabis the researchers need as there are very few researchers because of NIDA say so. It is the attitude that is all wrong and not that there need to be more locations.

There is a bogus picture being painted here. Now would I be for a second supply of cannabis for a new wave of cannabis research. Sure would. Why hasn't MA done research yet? It is not because they cannot grow enough in Mississippi. The picture being painted is all wrong. The problem is attitude and not growing locations that will grow nothing for nobody.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #10 posted by FoM on February 11, 2004 at 15:01:42 PT
Virgil and breeze
Thanks breeze. I sure didn't want to leave that mistake I made not fixed.

Virgil I know it was to get money to fund a medical marijuana growing operation at U. Mass. That's a wonderful thing.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #9 posted by Virgil on February 11, 2004 at 14:54:34 PT
They MA Senators were writing about money for MA
Kennedy and Kerry wrote a letter because they wanted funding for a research project in an MA university. The letter was about money and not about some profound ideology that cannabis policy should change.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #8 posted by breeze on February 11, 2004 at 14:46:37 PT
FOM
Well it is certainly understandable, when one reads a lot of material, and keys information into a pc as much as you do, a slip is going to happen from time to time.

I was just a little freaked when I saw that you wrote Edwards was for us, I had to read the article in full at that point! :0

It would be just like a politician to change his stance just to get votes, and then turn it around that he was mis-interpretted.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #7 posted by FoM on February 11, 2004 at 13:22:53 PT
breeze
Thank You! I fixed it! I know Edwards isn't on our side at all! I sure am sorry about that.

Thank you Senator Kennedy!!!

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #6 posted by breeze on February 11, 2004 at 13:19:02 PT
FOM- plus some advice for others...
Um, just clarify your comment,#4, Ed Kennedy- is endorsing the idea, not John Edwards the candidate.

Edwards is not in any way endorsing cannabis research,period. In J.Edwards hometown newspaper (Seneca, SC) they publish the age and name of all arrests made during the prior week, and 70% of the time it is for possesion, intent to distribute, or possesion of paraphanelia for use of cannabis.

The irony is that there are pipe shops in the surrounding counties, that supply bongs,pipes,papers,etc. But, in gas stations, crack pipes are sold right on the counter next to where you pay the person for gas. In some gas stations , you can even buy scales- digital and postal on the same counter. My local gas pumper even sells pre-rolled blunts in different flavors.

It has been told to me that it only becomes paraphanelia once it has been used for the purpose it was made.

The thing is, that the unsuspecting purchaser tends to forget is that the store video tapes all transactions made over the counter, in case of robbery or other incident. This could be how police in the area make so many arrests on a local level, but most people never think of it.

So, take this as a hint- never buy papers in your home town, or close to your house if you live in a rural community or city, you could be setting yourself up for a "reasonable cause" for a search.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by Virgil on February 11, 2004 at 10:24:48 PT
Do people just not get it?
If someone would want to carry this to another audience this is how I introduced the article at DU. http://tinyurl.com/dg4y It is for you to improve upon.

People that do not follow the cannabis story will find this article very informative. Cannabinoid research will spend 20 years to get to where we would be today, if the corruption of the government had not blocked the research of cannabis.

Federal prohibition brought a federal hedgemony that blocked all research without federal approval and for that matter, federal supply of cannabis for research. Federal approval only came when the research might lead to some harm that could be demonized and the real research was blocked. GW Pharmaceuticals has been in existance for about 6 years and it will bring cannabis extracts that meet clinical standards for consistency. What makes cannabis extracts so dangerous to pill company profits is that a the physicians call to do no harm will place cannabinoids first on the list of treatment and displace the patent medicines that are so costly/profitable.

This federal hedgemony uses the Controlled Substances Act and the DEA to effectively prohibit research. The DEA administers the Schedule of Narcotics that places cannabis and all individual cannabinoids as a Schedule 1 Narcotic. Using the criteria of the Schedule, cannabis should be a schedle 5 substance because it does not meet any of the three criteria needed for Schedule 1, when intellectual classification would mean it would have to meet all three. Even a Schedule 2 would mean our universities could research it even if NIH would neglect this call to research.

The Drug Bizarre Walters uses his cabinet post to repeatedly say "Marijuana is a dangerous and addictive drug?" Here we have taxpayer "servants" lying when they should say that it is not marijuana, it is cannabis. Cannabis is not dangerous and it actually will define 1 safety in medicine on a scale of 1 to anything. Cannabis is not addictive and the use of cannabis will decrease the dosage of opiates now used in pain treatment if not replace them in some patients. Cannabis is not a drug. Cannabis is a plant. As long as our Congress and our institutions call for ganjaganda like Walters delivers, you can believe your country's government is corrupted. NIH has a $28 billion annual budget and it takes a small company in the UK to bring clinical cannabis to the world. We have all been *ucked and we still are.

Here is a link to the article http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/18/thread18329.shtml Here is the Fast Company website- http://www.fastcompany.com/homepage/index.html

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by FoM on February 11, 2004 at 10:18:16 PT
I'm Very Happy
That we have Kerry and Kennedy endorsing this idea. It might just happen now I hope. I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on February 11, 2004 at 10:14:48 PT:

"Dr." Barthwell has either has a shockingly
poor understanding of the origins of our modern-day pharmacopeia - or she is being *deliberately* obtuse. Such behavior in a supposed healer is not exactly confidence inspiring; "Dr." Barthwell's position on this matter reminds me of the statement of Upton Sinclair about how hard it is to get someone to understand something when their paycheck is dependent upon NOT understanding it.

With extraordinarily few exceptions, every modern pharmaceutical has had a humble beginning as a 'raw plant'. Digitalis? Came from foxglove. Aspirin? White Willow bark. And every derivation of opiate came from the ol' *papaver somniferum'. On and on, example after example, gives the lies to "Dr." Barthwell.

'Raw plants' have been used and continue to be used as medicines around the world by those who cannot afford the kind of artificially packaged and exhorbitantly priced processed pharmaceuticals so common in the West.

By exhibiting either stunning ignorance or an equally stunning degree of self-serving self-deception, she does not inspire any confidence in her position...or her abilities and dedication as a healer.

The shameful things some people will do for a paycheck...

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #2 posted by Virgil on February 11, 2004 at 09:50:07 PT
Top notch article
Here is an article meant to convey information. Fast Company has managed to make a name for itself by reporting on what others will not. It only takes one outlet to make the informational blockade ineffective.



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #1 posted by FoM on February 11, 2004 at 09:26:29 PT
I Like This Article
It would be a good thing if the Mississippi Farm had competition.

Debris Picture from NIDA:

http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/debris.jpg

[ Post Comment ]


  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on February 11, 2004 at 09:18:49